Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 271 U.S. 472 - Chicago St Ry Co v. Coogan

Chicago St Ry Co v. Coogan’s Empirical Analysis

271 U.S. 472 · 1926

Citation profile

504
cited by 504 later decisions
38
cited 38 times by the Supreme Court
32
states following
November 2010
most recently cited

176 federal appellate · 6 district · 220 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 504 later decisions (38 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2010 · most notably Urie v. Thompson (1949), Gunning v. Cooley (1930)

176 federal appellate · 6 district · 220 state decisions — followed in 32 states

21701926193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Mondou v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad · Seaboard Air Line Railway v. Horton · Patton v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co. · Baltimore Co v. Groeger

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 504 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Whenever circumstantial evidence is relied on to prove a fact, the circumstances must be proved and not themselves presumed”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““By the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, Congress took possession of the field of employers’ liability to employees in interstate transportation by rail;' and all state laws upon that subject were superseded. * * * The rights and obligations of the petitioner depend upon that act and applicable principles of common law as interpreted by the federal courts. The employer is liable for injury or death resulting in whole or in part from the negligence specified in the act; and proof of such negligence is essential to recovery. The kind or amount of evidence required to establish it is not subject to the control of the several states. This court will examine the record, and if it is found that, as a matter of law, the evidence is not sufficient to sustain a finding that the carrier’s negligence was a cause of the death, judgment against the carrier will be reversed.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “By the federal Employers' Liability Act, Congress took possession of the field of employers' liability to employees in interstate transportation by rail; and all state laws upon that subject were superseded.... The kind or amount of evidence required to establish it is not subject to the control of the several states.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.